Thorry

This man has no idea what a data center actually is. Just go there on a regular day and look at how many people are working there. How the fuck are you going to do that in outer space? Shit breaks all the time, shit needs to be changed all the time and new hardware gets trucked in all the time.

Maybe Jeffrey should lay off the drugs for a while and maybe the media should just ignore his dumb ass.

That's Intel Cedarview, fully 64-bit capable.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/58917/intel-atom-processor-n2800-1m-cache-1-86-ghz/specifications.html

Yeah that can't be right. The last 32-bit Intel notebook CPU was the Pentium M Dothan, which was last sold about 20 years ago. Or maybe an early Intel Core Duo based on Yonah? Still very old.

@zloubida@sh.itjust.works Are you sure it's 32-bit? What CPU is it?

we end up with lost history

Oof, I felt this in my soul

There are a couple of things I do agree with in regards to the comments in code. They aren't meant as a replacement for documentation. Documentation is still required to explain more abstract overview kind of stuff, known limitations etc. If your class has 3 pages of text in comments at the top, that would probably be better off in the documentation. When working with large teams there are often people who need to understand what the code can and can't do, how edge cases are handled etc. but can't read actual code. By writing proper documentation, a lot of questions can be avoided and often help coders as well with a better understanding of the system. Writing doc blocks in a matter that can be extracted into a documentation helps a lot as well, but I feel that does provide an easy way out to not write actual documentation. Of course depending on the situation this might not matter or one might not care, it's something that comes up more when working in large teams.

Just like writing code, writing proper comments is a bit of an art. I've very often seen developers be way too verbose, commenting almost every line with the literal thing the next line does. Anyone who can read the code can see what it does. What we can't see is why it does this or why it doesn't do it in some other obvious way. This is something you see a lot with AI generated code, probably because a lot of their training was done on tutorials where every line was explained so people learning can follow along.

This also ties in with keeping comments updated and accurate when changing code. If the comment and the code doesn't match with each other, which one is true? I've in the past worked on legacy codebases where the comments were almost always traps. The code didn't match the comments at all, sometimes obviously so, most times only very subtle. We were always guessing was the implementation meant to be the comment and the difference just a mistake? The codebase was riddled with bugs, so it's likely. Or was the code changed at a later point on purpose and the comments neglected?

Luckily these days we have good tools in regards to source control, with things like feature branches, pull requests with tools that allow for discussion and annotation. That way at least usually the origin of a change is traceable. And code review can be applied before the change is merged, so mistakes like neglecting comments can be caught.

Now I don't agree with the principle of no comments at all. Just because a tool has some issues and limitations doesn't mean it gets banned from our toolbox. But writing actual useful comments is very hard and can be just as hard as writing good code. Comments also aren't a cheat card for writing bad code, the code needs to stand on its own and be enhanced by the comments.

It's one of those things we've been arguing about over my entire 40 year career. I don't think there is a right way. Whatever is best depends on the person, the team, the system etc. And like with many things, there are people who are good and people who suck. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Yes context is very important in Dutch. Which is why translations are almost always off. A Dutch speaker can almost instantly recognize whether a translation was done by someone with a native speaking level, or a machine. That's why a lot of Dutch folk prefer English on their computers and phones. The Dutch translations are often terrible, or as the Dutch would say "tenenkrommend".

Dutch is also a language you can very easily unlearn, even as a native speaker. I've experienced this firsthand, where I mostly use English and German every day. My Dutch has gotten terrible over the years.

This doesn't even scratch the surface of how weird the Dutch are. See this translation isn't really accurate, "Geef me een klap papa" translates to "Hit me father". A more accurate translation would be: "Geef me billenkoek pappie". (Even though this stil isn't completely accurate, the daddy thing got borrowed from US culture, so would still be daddy even in Dutch)

Now this might be a bit stranger, but not all that different. However when we zoom in on the word billenkoek it gets real weird. Just like other languages, for example German, the Dutch can just omit spaces and create longer and longer compound words. Billenkoek is one of those words, comprised of two words namely "billen" and "koek". The first word translates to buttocks, which makes sense, spanking involves hitting the butt. However the second word doesn't have a direct translation in English, but is a collection term enveloping baked goods such as cookies and certain kinds of cake. So it could be translated into "butt cake" .

What do spanking and cakes have to do with each other? And what exactly is a butt cake? Who knows, the Dutch are just very very weird.

(for all my etymology nerds, the term comes from rewarding good children with cookies and bad children with a different sort of cookies, namely corporal punishment)

Which funny enough is part of the reason they don't have trains. Some dickhead fascist billionaire charmed the simple brained with magic transportation, so they wouldn't invest in high speed rail anymore. Go figure

"Sure sure it's a bubble, but this one is a good bubble tho!"

STFU Jeffrey

Which would be the reason the hackers are celebrating

While this is good for some sort of movie or book plot, it isn't realistic. Remember humans and species we evolved from were around a lot longer than 40,000 years. We've encountered these microbes (or their cousins) before and will be able to handle them just fine. Especially because we have an evolutionary advantage over them, they don't know all the new tricks.

The ones to really be scared of are the ones that have become resistant to all of the antibiotics we have thrown at them. Those super bugs can kick our asses.

Yes, I work with people who have worked directly with the people at JetBrains. From what I know they are very friendly very western people. I can't imagine them being involved with Russia in any way.

I can also find zero sources online about this. The closest is Russia using security vulnerabilities in JetBrains software, as they do with all software. Security vulnerabilities that were handled appropriately by JetBrains.

There is however a very public statement from JetBrains about Russia and Ukraine stating they've pulled out of Russia. They got their people out and stopped anything they did there. Including work on a new campus they already put money into.

Long story short, JetBrains are good people creating useful tools. That dude made the whole thing up for unknown reasons.